I know defimation is hard to prove even under the best of circumstances in US courts, and a tweet is not one of those cases.

The jury are idiots.

Perhaps the diver's lawyer was Lionel Hutz, because in this case, he had plenty to go on. Not only this comment came from one of the world's most known businessmen, but the massive following and media attention it was getting would've amplified the comment. Musk claims that it was just some "off the cusp" comment, but that's ridiculous because he doubled down and claimed that because he's an old guy living in Thailand, he must be a kiddy-fiddler. He even had the fellow investigated to try to bring dirt on him ffs. That is NOT simply a little insult or barb.

Imagine if someone went out of their way to make your life hell like that? Now, amplify it by x1000 because of a massive following and media presence. If I were to do what Musk did to you, I would've been hauled in front of court and found guilty. For sure.

Perhaps the diver's lawyer was Lionel Hutz, because in this case, he had plenty to go on. Not only this comment came from one of the world's most known businessmen, but the massive following and media attention it was getting would've amplified the comment. Musk claims that it was just some "off the cusp" comment, but that's ridiculous because he doubled down and claimed that because he's an old guy living in Thailand, he must be a kiddy-fiddler. He even had the fellow investigated to try to bring dirt on him ffs. That is NOT simply a little insult or barb.

Imagine if someone went out of their way to make your life hell like that? Now, amplify it by x1000 because of a massive following and media presence. If I were to do what Musk did to you, I would've been hauled in front of court and found guilty. For sure.

You have to prove beyond reasonable doubt of financial or reputable damage.

Is he making less money? Do the people he works with and now think he is a pedophile? Those are the sort of things you gotta be able to show in court for a jury to see.

That's nearly impossible to prove over a tweet. You also have to think about legal precedent. We sue each other already over the dumbest thing. Over a tweet would be a new low.

Last edited by Jettisawn; 2019-12-07 at 02:56 AM.

The worst part about the internet is that it let the truly crazy, racist, and bigots find each other easily.

I would've thought a high profile figure calling someone a pedophile on social media, then accusing them of other things after deleting their initial tweet, was as cut and dry as you could get?

Elon Musk also called him a child rapist, so I don't particularly think this was just one isolated little insult. Hope the guy appeals.

Public opinion is what matters here, not one rich dude. Cut and dry would be this guy losing his job over that tweet because a significant number of people now think he's a pedophile. That did not happen, and I don't think anyone believed Musk when he tweeted about this.

People can call each other all the names they want. It only matters, as others have pointed out, if it leads to personal or financial harm.

- - - Updated - - -

Originally Posted by Wyrt

Ah, so defamation is perfectly fine as long as you do it via tweet.

This is freedom of speech, not defamation. We should all be happy that we can live in a society where we can call someone a pedo on the internet and not get thrown in jail.

Public opinion is what matters here, not one rich dude. Cut and dry would be this guy losing his job over that tweet because a significant number of people now think he's a pedophile. That did not happen, and I don't think anyone believed Musk when he tweeted about this.

People can call each other all the names they want. It only matters, as others have pointed out, if it leads to personal or financial harm.

You'd have to be either terribly naive or stupid to think there'd be no personal harm involved here when you consider the amount of media attention this was getting, coupled by the fact it was done by someone with an incredibly high profile and the huge number of followers that would believe every breath that comes from Musk's mouth.

This isn't simply just a case of someone calling people names on twitter, as the article I linked earlier shows. He even hired someone to dig stuff up on him. That suggests to me he's trying to make someone's life a living hell just because his ego is too big to accept that not everyone is going to agree with his spontaneous ideas (that sub was ridiculous).

Defamation isn't a criminal offense this was a civil case so there was no risk of Musk being thrown in jail.

Yeah you're right, although a $190M payout isn't much different. It was more to illustrate the point but I should have chosen my words more carefully.

- - - Updated - - -

Originally Posted by Fargus

You'd have to be either terribly naive or stupid to think there'd be no personal harm involved here when you consider the amount of media attention this was getting, coupled by the fact it was done by someone with an incredibly high profile and the huge number of followers that would believe every breath that comes from Musk's mouth.

This isn't simply just a case of someone calling people names on twitter, as the article I linked earlier shows. He even hired someone to dig stuff up on him. That suggests to me he's trying to make someone's life a living hell just because his ego is too big to accept that not everyone is going to agree with his spontaneous ideas (that sub was ridiculous).

The jury, which saw all the evidence, disagrees. Having not seen the evidence I can't say either way whether there was actually personal harm involved, but it seems like the guy kept his job and wasn't attacked, so that's a pretty good start towards an indication that there wasn't any real harm.

You have to prove beyond reasonable doubt of financial or reputable damage.

Really?

I didn't realise this was a murder case. Aren't civil cases governed with a lower burden of proof?

- - - Updated - - -

Originally Posted by Underverse

The jury, which saw all the evidence, disagrees. Having not seen the evidence I can't say either way whether there was actually personal harm involved, but it seems like the guy kept his job and wasn't attacked, so that's a pretty good start towards an indication that there wasn't any real harm.

He runs his own business IIRC.

Losing the case would just make him look like that what Musk said was true, which might impact his business. Something which he might use if he appeals.

Yeah you're right, although a $190M payout isn't much different.

Where's that figure come from? The diver initially wanted to settle for $75k.

I didn't realise this was a murder case. Aren't civil cases governed with a lower burden of proof?

- - - Updated - - -

He runs his own business IIRC.

Losing the case would just make him look like that what Musk said was true, which might impact his business. Something which he might use if he appeals.

Where's that figure come from? The diver initially wanted to settle for $75k.

You are correct, my point was that you have to prove to a jury that the person's words has caused real harm. It tends to be financially. That's a hard thing to prove.

You can lose business for a number of other reasons than someone's mean tweet, and him losing business over a court case he lost because of a tweet doesn't make it any better. That would have been his own fault for trying to become a multi-millionaire over a tweet. Which was all he was really trying to do? (IMO) Anyone who thinks otherwise has a lot more faith in the human condition than they should.

You can't just sue someone because they told a lie about you. That isn't enough and if it was courtrooms would be filled with a lot more frivolous lawsuits. I saw this outcome coming as soon as I first heard about the lawsuit. A lot more powerful and rich people have tried to sue for defamation and lost with more evidence than a tweet.

- - - Updated - - -

Originally Posted by Wyrt

Ah, so defamation is perfectly fine as long as you do it via tweet.

Love how people just read into what people are saying and think and say it as if it's an intelligent response.

More like, Defamation is really hard to prove and even harder when your key evidence is only a tweet.

The worst part about the internet is that it let the truly crazy, racist, and bigots find each other easily.